De La Cuesta v. Fidelity Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n

Good Law
121 Cal. App. 3d 328·175 Cal. Rptr. 467·1981 Cal. App. LEXIS 1938
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 2, 1981Civ. 23253California7,459 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kaufman, J.

Introduction

This is an appeal from summary judgment in favor of defendants in three cases consolidated in the trial court. Where appropriate, the cases will be referred to as the de la Cuesta case, the Moore case, and the Whitcombe case. Each action was commenced by the purchaser of property encumbered by a deed of trust seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against threatened foreclosure of the deed of trust by trustee’s sale following the purported exercise of the trust deed’s due-on-sale clause. The principal defendant in each action is the beneficiary named in the deed of trust, Fidelity Federal Savings and Loan Association, and the defendants will be referred to collectively as Fidelity Federal. The plaintiffs made motions for summary judgment asserting that in the absence of any showing it was reasonably necessary to avoid impairment of the security or risk of default resulting from the sale, Fidelity Federal was precluded from exercising the due-on-sale clause by the California law as set forth in Wellenkamp v. Bank of America (1978) 21 Cal.3d 943 [ 148 Cal.Rptr. 379 , 582 P.2d 970 ]. The trial court granted Fidelity Federal’s cross-motion for summary…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.